Present: President Osgood, Dean Swartz, Associate Deans H. Scott and P. Smith, J. Brand, E. Dobbs, R. Grey, M. Pillado-Miller, L. Sinnett, D. Smith, and B. Voyles

The President called the meeting to order at 4:18 p.m. in Nollen House.

Remarks by the President

David McConnell, Director of Grinnell College Dining Services since 1976, has accepted the position of Business Manager at Washington and Lee University in Lexington, VA, as of December 1.

The President reported that he has talked with the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees about the Fund for Excellence Proposals much in the same way that he has talked with the faculty. The response has been positive.

Remarks by the Dean

The Dean reported that he has gotten positive responses from several faculty members who appreciated his reminder to all faculty that courses should not meet outside the normally scheduled times since this can cause problems for students who work or who participate in co-curricular activities.

The Dean is working on a draft document on faculty allocation which he will bring to Council in the near future.

The Personnel Committee begins interim and some third-year reviews this week.

Shared Contract Proposals

Shared contract proposals must adhere to the guidelines outlined in the document on shared contracts created by Executive Council in 1995/96; our policy, however, in general and especially in regards to affirmative action, relating to after-the-fact conversions (conversion to a shared contract bringing in the second party after the original tenure-track contract is in place), needs to be clarified; Council recommended that the Affirmative Action Committee take this issue up sometime this year.

A related faculty appointment was discussed.

Continued Discussion of Document on Personnel Issues

Council picked up its discussion where it had left off last week and concluded that it would not recommend changing our current policy requiring peer-reviewed scholarship for promotion to full professor. Council recommends, however, that the Dean have post-tenure conversations with faculty about their professional goals every three or four years after tenure. Both the goal setting and the feedback might help faculty members meet the requirements for promotion to full professor after a reasonable amount of time at the Associate Professor rank.

The next unresolved issue pointed out in P. Smith's document "Division of Responsibilities: Faculty Executive Council and Faculty Personnel Committee" concerns the following: by what criteria does the Dean decide what information may be added to the review dossier, and by whom, after it has left the department? Ought the College to permit appeals based on the merits of the case (rather than restricting appeals to either "new evidence" or "significant procedural errors")? Dobbs suggested that the Dean come to Council with a list of proposed criteria for discussion. The Dean responded that ordinarily nothing is to be added to the dossier after it has been submitted to his office by the department. His office will work closely with departments to assure that the dossiers are complete. The occasions where materials would be added later should be rare and unusual, and it would not be possible to create a comprehensive list which would encompass all of these rare occasions.

Regarding appeals based on the merits of the case, Council concluded that this should not be allowed. Grounds for appeals either through the Personnel Committee or the Personnel Appeals Board are discussed in the Faculty Handbook on pages 36-38. The Dean remarked that our system for personnel reviews includes the President and the Dean in all of the discussions about personnel cases which allows both of them to intervene in the discussion and to be fully aware of the merits of the case.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m.

Helen Scott
Secretary